Malcolm Wallace
I notice you have gone for a "Numeric" category, rather than the "Mathematics" top-level category suggested by Dylan.
While pondering what else we'd put in mathematics other than numeric stuff, I hit upon the crazy idea of adding: Mathematics.Monad instead of putting Monad in Control (which is the current proposal, I believe). For: o it is accurate o monads which have nothing to do with control (List, Maybe, Parser?) will fit in quite nicely Against: o the Haskell learning curve gets even steeper o There's a bit of a conflict between being easy to use and being mathematically pure (e.g., Num is almost a ring but not quite (fromInteger springs to mind)). If we put things in Mathematics, the mathematicians have a strong argument for doing things the "Right Way" but if we leave it in Control, then the pragmatists retains some, ummm, control. I'm not sure myself if I think this is a good thing but I thought I'd throw it out and see if anyone else likes it enough to pick up. -- Alastair Reid reid@cs.utah.edu http://www.cs.utah.edu/~reid/ ps Irrespective of this, I think Mathematics is a good idea because sooner or later, someone is going to add matrix ops, rings, monoids, categories, etc. to the library and they will want a place to hold them.